PP FishQuest

[Pokey]

For those of you who play on the Party skins:

I hear that more fish play on the jackpot tables than the regular tables. However, the jackpot tables eat an extra $0.50 per hand for the jackpot bonus. Ignoring the possibility of a jackpot (which I consider to be too small and too infrequent to affect my behavior), do you find these tables sufficiently looser to justify the decreased EV from the jackpot rake?

[CallMeIshmael]

The skins I play sadly dont have these tables, so I cant really help you.... but:

[ QUOTE ]
Ignoring the possibility of a jackpot (which I consider to be too small and too infrequent to affect my behavior)

[/ QUOTE ]

seems kinda wrong.

You have an equity in that extra drop. For example, if you have a $0.40 equity in the drop, then you only need to make up $0.10 through bad play vs regular tables for these tables to me neutral EV.

[Pokey]

[ QUOTE ]
You have an equity in that extra drop. For example, if you have a $0.40 equity in the drop, then you only need to make up $0.10 through bad play vs regular tables for these tables to me neutral EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would that it were so....

According to Bonus Whores , Party Poker's rules require that the jackpot needs to reach >$193k to be break-even. Given that I rarely see the bonus over $50k, players typically get an equity share of under $0.15 for the $0.50 jackpot rake. While NO equity is an exaggeration, it's not MUCH of an exaggeration.

[KDawgCometh]

I play the Jackpot tables all of the time, the play is generally weak and I know I can make up the drop through getting these donks to pay me off more often

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Would that it were so....

According to Bonus Whores , Party Poker's rules require that the jackpot needs to reach >$193k to be break-even. Given that I rarely see the bonus over $50k, players typically get an equity share of under $0.15 for the $0.50 jackpot rake. While NO equity is an exaggeration, it's not MUCH of an exaggeration.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow that is ass dude.

Now, if we assume that you have a $0.15 equity in the extra rake (which seems a little too low, IMO... but I've never looked into this before) then you are losing 0.35/10 = $0.035/hand.

This translates to 0.88BB/100 at 2/4.

That seems like a hell of a lot to have to make up. Which leads to me believe that 0.15 may be too low.


Also, its probably a little lower, because when you divide by 10, you are assuming equal rake distribution, which isnt the case if you are a tighter player.

[PokerBob]

I no longer play at Party, but when I did, I played the BB tables when it got over $100K.